Monday, June 6, 2016

Wisconsin Voter ID Law Back In Court

On the last day of testimony in the trial in the renewed, as-applied challenge to Wisconsin's voter ID law, U.S. District Judge James Peterson made clear that he believes that the case will be appealed regardless of his ultimate
decision. Still, Peterson has already announced that the law willremain
in placethrough the August elections and noted that he hopes to make a
ruling “by the end of July”. Here is an overview of the arguments and
expert witnesses involved in the recent Wisconsin Voter ID case.

The
turnout in [the April] election — the state's highest in a presidential primary since
1972 — is a central part of the state's case. Lawyers for the state have
frequently noted the increased turnout in elections that have occurred since
the state's voter ID law was passed in 2011 and emphasized that the DMV
provides free IDs to those who need them.

Both sides have
expert witnesses on their lists to help bolster their arguments — and attempt
to discredit the expert witnesses whose reports conflict with their stance.

The State is using two high-profile
experts in M.V. Hood III, a Professor of Political Science at the University of
Georgia, andNolan McCarty, aSusan Dod Brown Professor of
Politics and Public Affairs at Princeton University. The conclusions of the defense’s experts include:

M.V. Hood III:

"…Wisconsin’s
election code provides a reasonable and common sense approach to the manner in
which elections are conducted in the state. Further, Wisconsin has acted to
continue to make elections more manageable, fair, and efficient (i.e.
standardization for in person absentee voting days and hours). As well, the
electoral climate in the state can be characterized as extremely positive as
evidenced by the fact that in three of the last four federal election cycles
Wisconsin recorded the second highest voter turnout rate in the country."

"The recent
changes to in-person absentee voting in Wisconsin represent a means by which
voter convenience can be balanced against the cost, both literal and
administrative, for providing this service."

"…the rate at
which absentee ballots have been rejected has fallen, not risen, over the last
two federal election cycles. My examination of Wisconsin’s registration process
involving the end of corroboration determined that this change instituted a
fair and consistent standard for all electors in the state. Finally, increasing
the residency requirement to 28 days places Wisconsin firmly in line with other
states that have similar requirements."

"…there
appears to be more than ample opportunity, time, and convenience for voters to
accomplish this duty (of voting) in the State of Wisconsin."

"I can think
of no reason that would lead me believe that the changes undertaken to
Wisconsin’s election code under challenge in this case have, or will have, a
detrimental impact on the ability of Wisconsin voters to cast a ballot,
including minority voters."

Nolan McCarty:

"Clearly, I
believe that there are many reasons to doubt (Kenneth Mayer's) conclusions.
First, rather than observing a 'significantly lowered … probability that a
voter [could] cast a ballot in 2014,' I documented that turnout increased
markedly from 2010 to 2014 for racial minorities as well as for whites. In
proportional terms (measured by the odds ratio), the turnout increases among
the registered and citizen voting age population were at least as large for
African-Americans as they were for whites."

"The findings
suggesting the absence or smaller effects on racial minorities, students, young
voters, and those without ID may largely be attributable to a variety of
attrition biases, measurement error, and misinterpreted findings."

"…I find
little evidence that the changes in Wisconsin electoral law had any significant
partisan effect. The 2014 gubernatorial election was almost an exact replay of
2010 both in terms of vote shares and turnout at the municipal level. Nor did I
find evidence that changes to absentee balloting reduced its usage by any racial
or ethnic group."

Liberal’s and the left continue to attack the
common sense voter ID regulations across the country, more often than not using
the same illogical arguments over and over again unsuccessfully. Most recently
courts have upheld state laws in the landmark voter ID cases inVirginiaandNorth
Carolina. At some point, the left must realize that
election integrity is a crucial piece of the voting process and it is necessary to
encourage voter involvement in elections. This should not come as a surprise to
many as several polls have shown a great deal ofpublic support for the laws.